Was it a mistake for me to lock the opinion of Hitler thread?

[Torie]

The background story is that I noticed the thread, felt a bit queasy about it (Hitler is almost a unique figure in that expressing a positive opinion of him is a per se expression of genocidal bigotry), but let it go, until it was reported, and then I felt I could not just let it slide, and needed to make a decision and decided to lock it. Then another poster appealed my decision, stating it was a mistake because it really did not violate a term of use.

Although it may not necessarily cause me to change my action, I am interested in Forum input on this one. To a limited extent, this Forum should be what you want it to be. We are but your servants, except to the extent our ultimate masters (Leips and through him, as his personal representative, Nym) tell us otherwise, or we feel your desires are, well, not in the best interests of the Forum in our best judgment. At least that is my view of the proper role of The Cave around here.

Thanks.

[Sopranos Republican]

To give a bit of constructive criticism (As I'm not one who protests everything the mods do, like some dear friends of ours) I think it should have been allowed to stay. Anything that is clearly satirical in nature such as that is mainly for fun, (I think we can all agree that humor should be allowed since politics can become very dry if it is all serious all the time) should be allowed to stay as everyone here is well aware someone like Hitler was a genocidal maniac that no decent person will tolerate the memorialization of.

I do agree that threads such as "opinion of Jews" or "Do you hate Asians" even if satirical in nature, should be given a short leash as they very easily could be taken the wrong way. Though if it were up to me, I'd allow threads based on different income levels, dwelling areas (i.e. suburbanites vs. urban hipsters or whatever), or political ideologies as these are more impersonal types of demographics than threads based on gender or ethnicity. But I believe threads that are opinions of specific people should be allowed regardless of how vile that individual person may be.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

I think it was the wrong idea.  I am of the mind that the most offensive of speech often needs the greatest of protection.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I think it was the wrong idea.  I am of the mind that the most offensive of speech often needs the greatest of protection.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

He charmed most of an entire country and his rise to power was remarkable by any standards when it comes to how quick it was.  Quite a task.  Evil bastard that he was.........

Yes, mistake.

[angus]

Was it a mistake for me to lock the opinion of Hitler thread?

I think you ought to grow a pair.

Either you lock it or you don't.  I wouldn't lock it, but if you lock it then at least have the pearls to stand behind your decision and not invite the forum to second guess your actions.

[Torie]

Was it a mistake for me to lock the opinion of Hitler thread?

I think you ought to grow a pair.

Either you lock it or you don't.  I wouldn't lock it, but if you lock it then at least have the pearls to stand behind your decision and not invite the forum to second guess your actions.

It was a close decision, and I genuinely wanted to know the thoughts of forumites on this. It's called feedback.

[SWE]

Option 3 (normal)

[Hifly]

Does it violate the Terms of Service? No? Then it shouldn't have been moderated.

[angus]

It's called feedback.

It's called feedback when you ask us which hat looks better on you, or whether that dress makes your ass look big.  On the other hand, when you capriciously and unilaterally make a decision that amounts to stifling freedom of expression, then ask us for our blessing either in order to appease your conscience or to give you justification ex post facto, then you look like a cross between a fascist and an insecure beta male who uses his undemocratically established authority to subvert the popular will.  You should appreciate the irony, considering the subject in question.

Own your decisions, man.  Stalin wouldn't have asked for benediction, would he?  And my guess is that you wouldn't have closed a poll asking our opinion of him, even though he killed far more innocent people than Hitler did.  After all, you never hijacked any of the millions of other asinine polls on this board, many of which were equally bizarre to, or even more bizarre than, the one to which you refer.

[SATW]

you made the correct decision. It's not that it was about Hitler that made the tread bad, it was more of the fact that thread was clearly created with the intent to troll, imho.

[Oak Hills]

Not a fan of pointless, unfunny troll threads, so no.

[Torie]

It's called feedback.

It's called feedback when you ask us which hat looks better on you, or whether that dress makes your ass look big.  On the other hand, when you capriciously and unilaterally make a decision that amounts to stifling freedom of expression, then ask us for our blessing either in order to appease your conscience or to give you justification ex post facto, then you look like a cross between a fascist and an insecure beta male who uses his undemocratically established authority to subvert the popular will.  You should appreciate the irony, considering the subject in question.

Own your decisions, man.  Stalin wouldn't have asked for benediction, would he?  And my guess is that you wouldn't have closed a poll asking our opinion of him, even though he killed far more innocent people than Hitler did.  After all, you never hijacked any of the millions of other asinine polls on this board, many of which were equally bizarre to, or even more bizarre than, the one to which you refer.

I am watching a program on the Roosevelts. You sound just like TDR, be macho, be a man, just do it, and damn them all (he I think had a high testosterone level naturally, while I do it thanks to the miracles of modern medicine). Do what you think is right. The thing is, is that I am not always sure what is right. Only God can be sure of that.  Anyway, I was not seeking blessing, I was seeking advice. If I think I have found the right path, I if necessary would take on the whole Forum, and try to sway them to my point of view. I don't mind being a minority of one. Been there, done that before. It's grand really, when you have a clear conscience doing it. But be careful to keep peripheral vision, just in case, well, you missed some things. And if you really did get it wrong, admit it! I find this approach to life, is what makes it worth living - for me.

[angus]

You traded the right to friendship when you became a Kapo.  Accept it.

Just beat us and be done with it.  Whatever gods may exist will judge you less harshly for that than for the masturbatory fantasies that you're engaging in now.  

Or, if you're not up to the task, then quit the job.  Really, Torie, this is unseemly, even for you.

edit:  Okay, that was a little harsh.  I was thinking of my department chair who I very much regard as a friend and colleague.  He has been very supportive and helpful, and is trying to navigate unfamiliar terrain.  I don't really regard him as Kapo, but as First among Equals.  Then again, his position was democratically determined (in before:  yes, I know that democracy is highly over-rated.)

You squelched a thread.  Presumably you did so with confidence and with honor.  Nevertheless, your decision does not seem defensible by any logical or historical standard because there was no rancor in the thread and it did not violate any terms.  Moreover, your only attempt to prosecute the thread was circular ("Hitler was Hitler").  Of course it was trolling, but it was not any more or less stupid than the many trolling threads which have been created herein.  Broadband is cheap, so even cost is not an excuse.  You succumbed to abject political correctness, and whether you want to admit it or not, you have had second thoughts and are now looking for both blessing and justification after the fact.  FWIW, I voted yes, but "who cares?" is probably a more honest response.  Still, I want to help you feel better.  For all your faults you are a pretty good moderator and I don't want to see you vomit like this in public very often.  You will not inspire confidence in yourself as a moderator, or of the moderation process generally, if you become wobbly.  You must accept that you act, with the aegis of the forum's Ultimate Dictator, as an autocrat.  If we are to accept the Terms of Site, then we must have a reasonable assurance that our moderators aren't given to fits of insecurity and self-doubt.  Let it go, and try to think *before* you act next time, instead of thinking after you act.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem as I see it, is where does the line get drawn. There are numerous historical figures, whilst not rising to the scale of Hitler, certainly did some rather terrible things. In terms of the body count, Stalin and Mao were worse then Hitler. Are all dictators going to be off limits to such pollings? Are just the really terrible ones? What is the criteria to separate really terrible from bad?

[Gustaf]

The poll in question had an extra air of silliness in that it asked us to assess Hitler as a person and not politically. That can't really be done with a genocidal dictator though.

Then again, that is a reasonably interesting point, although conveyed with pretty crude satire. I don't think it should have been locked, unless posts in it began to be objectionable but that's me. I'm pretty liberal with such things.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I'm not sure why we're trying to ban silliness, though. And if we were, I'd hope the mods would start by kicking out the people-children that pollute the forum with their obsession with strange cartoons, awful grammar, and pet issues, rather than those that just want to get a kick out of absurdity.

[Torie]

I'm not sure why we're trying to ban silliness, though. And if we were, I'd hope the mods would start by kicking out the people-children that pollute the forum with their obsession with strange cartoons, awful grammar, and pet issues, rather than those that just want to get a kick out of absurdity.

For just how long have you had this appetite for mass bannings?

[DemPGH]

Well, I would not have reported it (rather knee-jerk with both knees, no?), and I would not have locked it. There's nothing inflammatory in there, although it was going in the direction of annoying har-har comments at the time it was locked. But other threads go that way too, so where the line is is a good question.

I absolutely do not think discussion of people like Hitler should be prevented.

I do agree, though, that it's virtually impossible to have a positive personal opinion of the man, though.

"Opinion of" this group or that group is kind of childish to me, and honestly I don't really look at those threads. I guess I figure that if there is nothing inflammatory in them and if they are just silly or sarcastic, I would let them go. On other forums where I post, moderators will chime in on a potentially volatile thread and say, "Keep this on the level, guys" or something like that, and usually they do.